Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warrandyte Cricket Club (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. (non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 21:36, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Warrandyte Cricket Club (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable suburban amateur cricket team that only plays against other local teams in a certain district of Melbourne. There is at the the Victorian Premier Cricket and the Victorian SubDistrict Cricket Association above the loca league this one plays in. No noteworthy achievements, the unsourced table below indicates some wins in C/D/E or worse grades in sublocal competitions. No significant independent sources, just random score listings and phonebook listing Bumbubookworm (talk) 21:44, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:30, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:30, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep There is sustained long term coverage of the subject. I have not checked these but there are potentially over 5,000 references available here. The significant majority of these will be routine and-or minor and some not relevant, but even if only 1% are good references, there will be more than sufficient to support GNG. Looks like insufficient BEFORE was done. Aoziwe (talk) 10:11, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Does fail WP:NCRIC, but there seems to be enough sourcing for a GNG pass. While some sourcing will be trivial mentions there's does look to be enough there. They also had an Australian international play for them. Article does need a cleanup though, with lots of unsourced information and fancruft. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 12:59, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 07:25, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Yes, there's a lot of writing, but there are few references which establish historical notability in lieu of not meeting the club requirements of WP:NCRIC. StickyWicket (talk) 16:52, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I'm not seeing the Trove search by Aoziwe proving there is indepth coverage of this club. In the absence of actual examples of reliable sources, I am leaning to delete. LibStar (talk) 00:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I'm finding a lot of articles along the lines of [1] [2] and [3]. While the articles themselves aren't great, the club has evidently been documented regularly over a long time. NemesisAT (talk) 00:11, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:13, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:31, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.